Laserfiche WebLink
District. Hageman Holdings is willing to consider development of their property located on the south side of <br />Bunker Lake Boulevard, which is about 45.1 acres. However, they will be 'selective' with the proposed users; as, <br />they don't want to compromise the long term goal for their school campus to the north. This area south of Bunker <br />Lake Boulevard is currently located in the B-2 Highway Business District, which allows for retail type uses. <br />With that in mind, Hageman Holdings' property needs would need a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, followed by <br />a Zoning Amendment to allow for an industrial park to the south of Bunker Lake Boulevard (45.1 acres). Staff has <br />an inquiry into their management team to indicate whether or not Hageman Holdings would support a Zoning and <br />Comprehensive Plan Amendment. It is estimated, a the City will receive a response no sooner that one (1) to two <br />(2) months. Additionally, it is Staffs estimation, Hageman Holdings will be conservative with their asking price, at <br />least $87,120 per acre or $2.00 per square foot. This property has partial, proper road and utilities in place today. <br />The remaining lanes of the four (4) lane Bunker Lake Boulevard extension would need to be completed with any <br />future development along the Bunker Lake Boulevard extension, consistent with the agreement for ALPHA <br />DEVELOPMENT, the Plat approved for Hageman Holdings. <br />6. MPCA Landfill Property <br />The MPCA controls about 270 acres of State owned land which encompasses a closed landfill in Ramsey. The <br />MPCA regulates the closed landfill in Ramsey through Closed Landfill Program (CLP); which was granted <br />authority from the 1994 Minnesota Landfill Clean-up Act (LCA). <br />About sixty (60) acres of MPCA owned land is currently located in the E-1 Employment District on the north side <br />of Sunwood Drive just east of Bunker Lake Boulevard. However, as part of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update, <br />the MPCA requested an amendment to 'Closed Landfill' to remain consistent with the Closed Landfill Land Use <br />Plan, citing State Statute as the proper authority. In addition, MPCA Staff has indicated that the E-1 Employment <br />Zoning District is inconsistent with their current and future plans for the site. Today, utilities run past this site along <br />with appropriate road capacity. <br />Staff contacted the MPCA regarding purchasing a portion/all of the sixty (60) acres of property currently located <br />within the E-1 Employment District. The MPCA showed strong initial opposition to allowing the land to be <br />developed by the private sector (i.e. and industrial park) due to needs for managing risks associated with a closed <br />landfill and for potential, future soil remediation. In addition, a major factor in the limited use of this site is the <br />State bonding dollars that were used to acquire the site for the Closed Landfill Program. These acquistion dollars <br />restrict the use to public use. Furthermore, the MPCA has stated that public use shall be also limited in scope due to <br />the sensitive nature of the Closed Landfill. However, the MPCA did show an appetite to allow for a City owned <br />public works campus. Staff is working with the MPCA now to provide a written response to confirm these <br />assumption. In any scenario, it is likely this process will take several months to unfold. <br />Regarding the remaining three sites (3, 4, 6), staff has the following comments to provide: <br />Site 3: <br />It is unlikely site 3 would be a viable industrial park as it is also owned by Al Pearson. If the City were to <br />rezone the Al Person property to the north of Highway 10 from residential to industrial, it is likely the City <br />would also need to rezone the industrial property to the south of Highway 10 back to residential (to balance <br />the Comprehensive Plan). Additionally, due to location, this site would require significant <br />infrastructure/utility improvements; and would be cost prohibitive. <br />Site 4: <br />Staff has not contacted this property owner yet. Details shall follow. However, from a preliminary <br />standpoint, it is unlikely this site will be a viable industrial park (when compared to other options). Due to <br />location, this site would require significant infrastructure/utility improvements; and would be cost <br />prohibitive. Additionally, the site would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Amendment. <br />Site 6: <br />This site is shovel ready, there is a willing seller and there is infrastructure/utilities in place (or nearby). This <br />site is located in the B-2 Highway Business District, and would therefore require a Comprehensive Plan <br />